NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #5

[nauticant]

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), has brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claims to be a transwoman, that is observed as male at birth but asserting a female gender identity.

The Employment Tribunal hearing started on Monday 3 January 2025 and is expected to continue for 2 weeks. The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton started giving evidence on 6 February.

Access to view the hearing remotely can be obtained by sending an email request to [email protected] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

The hearing is being live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr. This also has threadreaderapp archives of live-tweeting of the sessions of the hearing for those who can't follow on Twitter, for example: archive.is/xkSxy.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: https://nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse

Thread 2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2

Thread 3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268347-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-3

Thread 4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268942-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-4

I'm in. All kudos to the admin who replied in super quick time to my request for remote access.

NC Covering email was disclosed on Tuesday with an undisclosed attachment. Didn't know whether this attachment was Hate Incident or Formal Complaint. Last night at 9pm the attachment was disclosed. So know that now.
NC Telling detail emerging from the chronology is that Davidson was still investigating up until (missed exact date) February.

It can't go down well with the panel that the respondents have been hiding info and not disclosing. It's very underhand. If you've got nothing to hide you'd hand over everything straight away.

'we now know that the doc ... mysterious genesis up until now, we now know that was supplied to Esther Davidson on 14th Feb'

Now discussing a Letter from [?] to the board ... 'that letter complains that suspension shouldn't have happened, was ill-judged and disproportionate, talks about the impact on the claimant, asks board to lift suspension and assure claimant that female only changing facilities will be returned to female only use'

'at some point after that letter was received, Esther Davidson's investigation was aborted for reasons unexplained, and a new investigator was found'

So is Fife doing a Post Office? Hiding documents? Then sending them late in the day so they can't be fully analysed?

So the original investigator was cancelled, and a new investigator was brought in, and the reasons for that have not been disclosed to the tribunal?

I haven't followed it all but these words stood out

Sounds about right on what has happened and should have happened instead

It seems like NC steps up and suddenly there's discussion of actual legal stuff, not feelings..

Some of the misogynists who hate this site so much really are in the moral gutter.

What would JR's involvement in the withholding be?

'sceptisim that an order of 3rd Jan has been properly complied with'

'decision to start a new investigation headed by Angela Glancy'

I think NC is detailing information they haven't received.

All the documentation hasn't been produced by the respondent.

'all of which is squarely within Judge's order'

NC "inconceivable"

In a tone that very much conveys "they are taking the piss judge"

switching investigators mid complaint would produce a considerable amount of paperwork.

No sign of this paperwork.

That does sound very Judy Sheindlin, i agree @MarieDeGournay !

I rather love her, by the way.

And it was an English Judge in relation to a Family Court case, i think it was.

I wish you could "wave" at the well known names...Roz Adams, Bev Jackson, Joanna Cherry KC et al

Omg.

I don't know if there's a way to tell for sure but I make it about 500 viewing this online.

It's not loud enough though, I'm on full volume but can hardly hear anything.

Have I understood correctly?
So they were advised they’d done it wrong and needed to sort it out pronto and they…. Appointed someone else to give advice they liked more??!!

Judge - 'whch parts of that ar eyou relying on?'

NC - any docs relating to investigation, judge's order very broad tersm for all the documentation relating to investigation, simply hasn't been produced. Has been wrung out of the 1st respondent in dribs and drabs. Hasn't yet been fully complied with.

It can be hard to tell with the legal language but sounded like it.

Probably

TWETMIRF surely JR wouldn't have not disclosed documents she knew about, it would be more than her job's worth... but she might not have asked questions about what Fife was not telling her about?